Critical Reflection ETL 505

This subject is one of my last, deliberately left as I suspected I would be challenged by it and hoped more time working in the library would assist me. I am a creative person who excels more with words and pictures than numbers and finds technical processes generally difficult. I have come to the conclusion that when it comes to metadata and cataloguing you either love it or hate it, but generally most people find it challenging!  Aside from this I more clearly see the purpose of having and using a standardised system for describing and analysing resources in order to provide access for users both globally with the International Federation of Library Association and Institutions (IFLA) Standards and locally with Schools Catalogue Information Service (SCIS). Hider (2012) has provided me with the necessary definitions and technical terms which although struggling to understand at times, has provided me with a basic understanding that effective and standardised information organisation equates with improved access for users.  I appreciate the complex process of cataloguing resources and am grateful that cataloguers enjoy their work and that these services exist for schools.

This subject has highlighted many of the inconsistencies and errors in cataloguing in my own school library which I have discovered and inadvertently contributed to myself. Even though SCIS records are imported it still shows the importance of  ensuring the subject headings meet the needs of school users and any adjustments made are complimentary and do not impede access to the full utilisation of  resources schools already have. Hider (2012)

Assignment two has highlighted the difficultly in cataloguing without viewing the physical resource, reinforcing that assigning correct subject headings requires detailed knowledge of the content and the curriculum. This subject has provided future directions on solving some of the cataloguing dilemmas which occur with unclassified resources. I feel I would have the basic understanding and necessary resources to allocate appropriate headings and Dewey numbers. I have developed a deeper knowledge of the language of subject headings and sub divisions which I am sure will assist me and others with access. I have realised the value of cross references and admit to panicking that my library perhaps did not have them. I know I have some amending, rationalising and fine tuning of subject headings in the future.

It appears however, it is an exciting and challenging time for cataloguers as they must come to grips with Resource Description and Access (RDA) primarily designed to help libraries transition to the technological capabilities available via the Internet. I recently experienced through my work placement in ETL 507, that many cataloguing positions in public libraries have been made redundant due to cost cutting and outsourcing of cataloguing and ‘shelf ready’ processing by large companies. Perhaps as Hider (2012) states cataloguers may need to advocate for their positions and look for changes that will enhance and improve use of the bibliographic data they provide to ensure they remain viable p.188. O’Connell (2013) and Mitchell (2013) state that RDA has the potential to open up resources within and beyond our libraries through tailoring catalogue data to the educational and recreational content being used in schools.

Innacuracies in Cataloguing

I have identified a few inaccuracies in my school library and have generally tried the common sense approach to fixing things up, hopefully providing better access. Other issues have more than likely been created by myself and others through lack of knowledge and understanding of classification . Even today I was questioning some manually accessioned books as the ISBN numbers returned no results in SCIS or Trove. My library assistant generally does most downloading of SCIS records and accessioning resources as this was the default position when I began  with no experience in this area. She always seeks advice from me on locations, challenging subjects. In my absence she assigned a series of popular Doctor Who novels with a call no for the series rather than the individual authors of the12 book collection. I was going to edit the resources but realised she had placed herself in the shoes of the user thinking about how they would readily access these popular books. It was obvious they would search for Doctor Who. So at this stage I’m going to leave them right or wrong. I guess I can always edit them at a later stage. I will shelve them as a series for ease of access for now anyhow. Inconsistencies and Problems with access and location usually present themselves during stocktake and can be edited to provide better access at a later date. I'm now wondering if I should be taking on more of the responsibility of importing Scis and  accessioning resources?

ETL 505 Describing and Analysing Educational Resources

I deliberately saved this subject until last as to be honest it was one which had a reputation among other teacher librarians as being challenging by its technical components.I was told it is "a rite of passage for librarians".  I also left it until last as I thought some extra experience in managing  a library may be beneficial to my understanding. So far I have found it challenging and have a feel for the basics of metadata and information organisation. I must admit however I do not desire a job in the professional cataloguing field. I am happy to download SCIS catalogue records and leave RDA to the experts. 

EER - Introduction to Educational Research

EER 500 gave me an insight into the skills required  to read, understand and evaluate the relevance of educational research. The subject continually builds upon itself and shows that research is an evolving and unfolding  iterative process. I found the subject both stimulating, challenging, frustrating  and highly time consuming. My lecturer was outstanding with the amount of  support and scaffolding she gave us  for our experience along the way. You couldn't ask for more.  This subject was very different to the others and I was thankful there were no module activities. Research is a slow process and we were able to select a research question to explore and develop. This was very interesting and engaging as we all have those burning questions. My question was about Bring your Own Device (BYOD) and issues of equity in regional and remote areas of Australia.

Critical Reflection ETL 501

The pathfinder was created to assist and guide students and teachers to locate quality resources for the new Australian Curriculum History topic of First Contact (British Colonisation).  It is intended to primarily be used by students in year four aged approximately 9 and 10 years of age. A unit of work called First Contact – First Fleet developed by the History Teachers Association of Australia has been designed to support Australian Curriculum. The topic examines the experiences and the nature of contact between Indigenous and European communities. It integrates the two strands of Historical Knowledge and Understanding and Historical Skills into an inquiry research task.

The Australian Curriculum General Capabilities explicitly identify critical and creative thinking as essential competencies and there is a stronger emphasis upon these evident in learning outcomes in the history curriculum McIlvenny (2013). Critical thinking is essential to the historical inquiry process as it requires students to question and interpret the past through various resources including artefacts, documents, and images. Creative thinking is important in developing students own interpretations to explain aspects of the past that are not as clearly understood.  The pathfinder will guide students to develop good search strategy and reinforce information skills and literacies. 

One of the challenges in resourcing this topic was finding websites with reading levels and content suitable for the students. Most websites had higher reading levels particularly when searched using Google Bilal (2003). The history unit of work suggested texts I considered unsuitable for year 4 reading and comprehension levels at my school. Therefore teacher librarians must consider recommended texts in context of student learning needs and support the use of more challenging resources with use of Learning Journals to record questions and reflections in the process of learning.  I now place more priority on reading level and readability and include Simpson’s (2009-2014) Readability Test Tool to assist

The process of creating the pathfinder made me reflect upon my own search strategies and of the students I teach. I agree with Valenza (2004) & Combes (2009) in their findings that students often rely on one source of information from the internet and are not critical users of information. Students appear confident but have a reliance on using one search engine. I have also generally found that students display impulsiveness in their search strategies which Kuiper, Volman & Terwell (2008) identify. I have identified problems with student’s use of information and copy and paste behaviour but did not fully understand the implications of good search strategies, reading level, readability and how they influence this.

 I tried to replicate the search experience of students whilst trialling a variety of search terms with a number of search engines. I considered and evaluated the search results using website evaluation criteria adapted from Barcalow (2003) Harris (2010), Valenza (2014), & Herring (2011). I selected the search engine KidRex for its simple uncluttered design and safe filtering for children as an alternative to Google. This process was time consuming but valuable as it made me reflect on my own inadequate search strategy and how I could improve upon both my own and my students. Libguides provided some problems and limitations with web design through provision of a general template. I question if cost would be prohibitive when a Wiki or website tool could do a similar job Valenza (2014).

The pathfinder will assist students and teachers to access quality information related to curriculum and specific learning needs. Students are often overwhelmed with information seeking and a pathfinder provides a guide or map to eliminate many of the uncertainty and confusion which Kulthau (1995) describes in the information process.  Time will be saved searching for resources and poor information literacy habits including copyright and plagiarism will lessen as a result. By inclusion of correct referencing, students will be mindful of citing all sources of information, and the legal and ethical ramifications of plagiarism, copyright and Creative Commons considerations. Students are able to see teachers as collaborators, creators and models of best practice of information literacy, allowing them to develop their own personal models for information use Herring (2011).

Constructing a pathfinder was time consuming but once established would be much easier to access, edit, update and reuse for a variety of topics. Pathfinders provide opportunities for teacher librarians to collaborate with staff to facilitate information literacy within schools and support students in the use of guided inquiry O’Connel (2008). A pathfinder provides advocacy for the teacher librarian, library and school. If it is tailored to the specific learning needs of a group of students in their school it provides consistency, motivation and engagement with the information process Herring (2011).

The pathfinder process itself was important, as it made me reflect and refine search strategy, website evaluation criteria and how ultimately we are limited in the choice of quality resources appropriate for the audience.  I found website evaluation started to become a much more automatic and intuitive process. I also have a better understanding of copyright issues but still need to develop my understanding of the complexities.

Reference List

Australian Curriculum and Assessment Reporting Authority, (ACARA). (2010). General capabilities. Retrieved from: http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/GeneralCapabilities/Overview/General-capabilities-in-the-Australian-Curriculum

Bilal D. (2013).Comparing Google’s readability of search results to the Flesch Readability Formulae: A preliminary analysis on children’s search queries. In: Proceedings of the 76th ASIS&T Annual Meeting. Montreal, Canada: Information Today;. pp. 1-9.

Barcalow, T. (2003). CARS: Evaluating websites.Retrieved from http://lrs.ed.uiuc.edu/students/tbarcalow/490NET/Evaluation.htm

Brent Media. (2014). Kidrex Search. Retrieved from http://www.kidrex.org/

Combes, B. (2009). Generation Y: Are they really digital
natives or more like digital refugees? Synergy, 7(1), 31-40. Retrieved, from http://www.slav.schools.net.au/synergy/vol7num1/coombes.pdf

Creative Commons. Retrieved from http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

Education services Australia. (2013). AC History: First Fleet. Retrieved from http://www.achistoryunits.edu.au/verve/_resources/Htaa_first_fleet_Program.pdf

Harris, R. (2010). Evaluating Internet research resources. Retrieved from http://www.virtualsalt.com/evalu8it.htm 

Herring, J. (2011). Improving Students Web Use and Information Literacy: A Guide for Teachers and Teacher Librarians. London: Facet Publishing.

Kuhlthau, C. C. (1995). The process of learning from information. School Libraries

Worldwide 1,(1), 1-12. Retrieved from http://www.iasl-online.org/pubs/slw/

Kuiper, E., Volman, M. and Terwel, J. (2008). Students' use of Web literacy skills and strategies: searching, reading and evaluating Web information. Information Research 13(3).Retrieved from http://www.informationr.net/ir/13-3/paper351.html

McIlvenny, L. (2013). Critical and creative thinking in the new Australian curriculum part one.Access, 27(1), 18-22. Retrieved from http://www.asla.org.au/publications/access/access-national-journal.aspx

O'Connell, J. (2008) Information literacy meets Library 2.0 School library 2.0 : new skills, new knowledge, new futures, ch. 4, p. 51-62, 2008 / Judy O'Connell Available at eReserve at  http://www.csu.edu.au/division/library/ereserve/pdf/oconnell-j.pdf

Simpson, D. (2009-2014). The readability test tool. Retrieved from http://read-able.com/

Springshare. (2007- 2013). Libguides. Retrieved from http://www.springshare.com/libguides/

Valenza, J. (2004). Substantive searching: Thinking and behaving info-fluently. Learning & Leading with Technology, 32(3), 38-43. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA124941133&v=2.1&u=csu_au&it=r&p=EAIM&sw=w&asid=59a22eb1aac9398f944d9e52c495d526

Valenza, J. (2014). Ten reasons why your next pathfinder should be a wiki. Retrieved from http://informationfluency.wikispaces.com/Ten+reasons+why+your+next+pathfinder+should+be+a+wiki

Valenza, J. (2014). Information Literacy Skills: CARRDS. Retrieved from https://joyce-valenza.wikispaces.com/Information+Literacy+Skills